IIT Bombay has witnessed a fresh development in the controversy surrounding the death of second-year BTech student Sahil Wakode, with its Faculty Forum expressing solidarity with Professor Suryanarayana Doolla. The statement came after Wakode’s parents alleged that their son had faced caste-based harassment and accused the professor of mistreatment. The allegations have intensified debate on the circumstances surrounding the student’s death and the procedures followed after an examination-related incident.
According to the Faculty Forum’s statement cited in reports, Doolla was invigilating a mid-semester examination on September 18, 2026, when he allegedly noticed a student using a smartphone without authorisation. The forum said that the professor reported the incident to the institute authorities in accordance with the academic procedure approved by the Senate. It described Doolla’s conduct as part of his official responsibilities and said it was distressed by what it regarded as damage to his professional reputation.
The Faculty Forum of IIT Bombay also began its statement by mourning the student’s death and conveying condolences to his family. At the same time, it said it stood in solidarity with Doolla, stressing that the professor was carrying out duties under the academic rules then in force. The statement was signed by Professor Rajkumar S. Pant, president of the Faculty Forum.
The case has drawn attention because the examination incident and the student’s death occurred within a short period. Reports say Wakode was found with a smartphone during the examination and later died by suicide in his hostel room on September 18. The circumstances have since triggered protests on campus and demands for action against the faculty member.
IIT Bombay has also become the centre of competing accounts about what happened before the examination. Wakode’s parents reportedly alleged on September 19 that their son had been subjected to mental harassment and casteist remarks over a period of months. They further alleged that the conduct was connected to the institute administration. These claims have not been established as facts, and the available reports do not provide an independent finding confirming them.
The professor was subsequently booked under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act following a complaint by the student’s parent, according to the report. The legal development means that the allegations are now part of a formal process, where evidence and statements can be examined through the appropriate authorities.
IIT Bombay’s official faculty information identifies Doolla as a professor in the Department of Energy Science and Engineering. His academic profile records a B.Tech in Electrical Engineering, an M.Tech in Energy Systems Engineering from the institute and a Ph.D. in Power Systems from IIT Delhi. His listed research areas include smart grids, microgrids, power-system operation and control, and integration of distributed energy resources.
The incident has placed a difficult question before IIT Bombay: how should an institution respond when an academic disciplinary matter is followed by a student death and serious allegations against a faculty member? The Faculty Forum’s statement represents the position of the institute’s faculty body, while the student’s family has presented a different account of events. Establishing what happened will require examination of records, witness accounts and any available evidence rather than conclusions based solely on competing public statements.
For the campus community, the immediate issue extends beyond the dispute between individual parties. IIT Bombay must balance the need to maintain examination integrity and established academic procedures with the responsibility to address student concerns and allegations of discrimination fairly. Transparency in any institutional or legal inquiry will therefore be important to understanding the sequence of events.
The controversy is likely to remain under scrutiny as the investigation and legal process develop. IIT Bombay’s faculty forum has made its position clear: it believes Doolla was performing an assigned academic responsibility and should not be held responsible merely for reporting alleged examination malpractice. The student’s family, meanwhile, has raised allegations that require due consideration by the competent authorities. The facts emerging from those processes will be central to determining what occurred before and after the examination.
